David Posted May 27, 2011 Author Share Posted May 27, 2011 If Scots are smart (and I doubt that many of them will be able to see through the propaganda that we'll undoubtedly see when the time comes) they'll opt for independence and get ourselves as far away from these jokers as possible. Â Good luck without the massive Wminster subsidies that pay for your prescriptions and University fees Once we sort out the situation regarding the oil supplies in Scottish water we won't need subsidies from anyone. Besides, why can we get free prescriptions and university education but England can't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildSybianRider Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 Indeed. Such a renewable and non-finite economic foundation for independence cannot possibly go wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 Scottish Water? The stuff that comes in bottles in Sainsburys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted May 27, 2011 Author Share Posted May 27, 2011 I guess we'll see how the UK Government react when Salmond names the date for the referendum. I have a feeling they'll be going all out to avoid it happening though, which doesn't make much sense if we are nothing but a burden on Englands tax resources. Â Surely they would be more than happy to let us go our own way, and add the huge savings they would make to their deficit reduction fund? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Ronnie Posted May 27, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted May 27, 2011 I guess we'll see how the UK Government react when Salmond names the date for the referendum. I have a feeling they'll be going all out to avoid it happening though, which doesn't make much sense if we are nothing but a burden on Englands tax resources. If that were Westminster's attitude, then it would be keen to get rid of other disadvantaged areas too. It isn't. It still transfers money from wealthier parts of England to poorer ones. The fact that it might be keen to hold on to Scotland doesn't mean that Scotland is secretly a profitable source of revenue, so much as part of the United Kingdom that many in Westminster don't want to see broken. Westminster hasn't been tempted to grant independence to, say, Oldham, Stoke, or even Tower Hamlets to ease the economic burden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted May 27, 2011 Author Share Posted May 27, 2011 If that were Westminster's attitude, then it would be keen to get rid of other disadvantaged areas too. It isn't. It still transfers money from wealthier parts of England to poorer ones. The fact that it might be keen to hold on to Scotland doesn't mean that Scotland is secretly a profitable source of revenue, so much as part of the United Kingdom that many in Westminster don't want to see broken. Westminster hasn't been tempted to grant independence to, say, Oldham, Stoke, or even Tower Hamlets to ease the economic burden. That's not quite the same thing though, is it? Oldham, Stoke or Tower Hamlets aren't actual countries in their own right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soretooth Posted May 27, 2011 Share Posted May 27, 2011 http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/ma...me-improvements  David Cameron spent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbins Posted May 28, 2011 Share Posted May 28, 2011 I don't mind so much. Tbh, I'd be a bit embarassed for us if the US President went to our Prime Minister's house and it was a bit shit.  I think the general point is that when the nation is in the shape it is in it is not the best idea to pose for a pic in your designer Kitchen not that it it wrong for them to have a decent Kitchen.  Still though I'm with Magnum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted May 29, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted May 29, 2011 If Scots are smart (and I doubt that many of them will be able to see through the propaganda that we'll undoubtedly see when the time comes) they'll opt for independence and get ourselves as far away from these jokers as possible. Â I used to be pro-independence for Scotland, but now I'm not. You lot just cannot abandon us lefties and leave us permanently at the mercy of these abject fuckers. You and Wales are the only ones stopping the cunts from getting it all their own way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted May 30, 2011 Author Share Posted May 30, 2011 I used to be pro-independence for Scotland, but now I'm not. You lot just cannot abandon us lefties and leave us permanently at the mercy of these abject fuckers. You and Wales are the only ones stopping the cunts from getting it all their own way. Don't worry Carbomb, I'll be suggesting to big Eck that we implement a rule that each Scotsman is allowed to nominate one non-Scot to take up dual nationality. I'll put your name down, then you can join the rest of us in living out Happ's worst nightmare up north! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted May 30, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted May 30, 2011 I used to be pro-independence for Scotland, but now I'm not. You lot just cannot abandon us lefties and leave us permanently at the mercy of these abject fuckers. You and Wales are the only ones stopping the cunts from getting it all their own way. Don't worry Carbomb, I'll be suggesting to big Eck that we implement a rule that each Scotsman is allowed to nominate one non-Scot to take up dual nationality. I'll put your name down, then you can join the rest of us in living out Happ's worst nightmare up north! Â Yay! Get the fuck in. Now all I've got to do is practice my slang. Â *clears throat* Â Ya wee lump o' keech, yer lucky a'm wearin ma guid trainers or a'd stove yer ribs in an pit yer heid doon the bog. Noo a'm aff tae get ma Nat King. Get it up ye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted May 30, 2011 Author Share Posted May 30, 2011 Ya wee lump o' keech, yer lucky a'm wearin ma guid trainers or a'd stove yer ribs in an pit yer heid doon the bog. Noo a'm aff tae get ma Nat King. Get it up ye. That's actually not too bad! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Posted May 31, 2011 Author Share Posted May 31, 2011 (edited) At least we are seeing some sort of positive action against alcohol abuse by the Scottish Government. Hopefully they'll go a bit further than that eventually;  People under the age of 21 could be prevented from buying alcohol from many off-sales, corner shops and supermarkets under new powers to be introduced across Scotland later this year. Local authorities have been given the green light to ban individual outlets from selling alcohol to people aged between 18 and 21 where the stores have previously fallen foul of the law by selling to under 18s, or where there is a problem with teenage drinking.  The move comes as the majority SNP Government signals its intent to tackle Scotland Edited May 31, 2011 by David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patiirc Posted May 31, 2011 Share Posted May 31, 2011 Rasing the age of buying alcohol to 21 and making it more expensive isnt going to solve the problem not does it tackle it its more a hit and hope  As with cigarettes, making it seem more 'dangerous' and alluring, only draws people towards it as a forbidden taboo.  Yes people have and are quitting cigarettes in great numbers, however currently Ive not seen more young people smoke than I can remember ever being the case. Nearly all the people I know from 18-25 I know smoke and that's not just because i associate with smokers primarily. It seems socially the done thing without the need for peer pressure. The only 2 poeple i know in my close circle of friends that dont smoke are nearly 30 and one is an ex smoker at that  Translate that to alcohol and you have a situation as mentioned on this board or maybe even in this thread aeons ago, whereby people will always be able to get alcohol of some description because its the done thing, and there is fuck all for people to do because they are bored because successive generations have done it all for them and as a result want for nothing generally, have fuck all to fight for and will generally have little in the way of prospects.  However that only deals with young people obtaining alcohol. You could then look at the reasons why people drink and attitudes towards it. Many social commentators stereotype the British as alcoholics, because its the done thing to drown your sorrows, blow away any stresses and relax or whatever with Beer. Until the pervailing attitude changes then there is no real chance of it changing. As seeing as drinking has been the face of the british since it was more beneficial to drink beer, and gin because of the water had been distilled and was less likely to kill you than the cholera infested water back in the day then, raising the prices and age of consumption isnt going to fix it at all, it didnt work in the US with Prohibition ( bootleggers, Moonshine etc) nearly 80 years ago, so why do people suddenly think that these things will work now?  Its all about control. They want to give the illusion that they are tackling a media hyped problem for the benefit of society as it is the cause of its ill's esepcially those of the young, However the young have always been a 'problem' its nothing new and just raising prices and ages isnt tackling any actualy problems its just doing that and hoping for the best.  Utter Gash imho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ReturnOfTheMack Posted May 31, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted May 31, 2011 On the other hand I know very few smokers, seems to be dying out around here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts